OT: New poll numbers: U-M vs. Sparty support, Fab Five, Chris Webber

I’ve periodically posted numbers from robo-pollster Public Policy Polling on Michigan athletics. They released some new figures on Friday that I wanted to share.

First, more Michiganders – 39 percent – said they were Michigan fans, versus 26 percent who said they considered themselves more fans of Sparty. Thirty-five percent expressed no opinion. For context from past PPP polls:

Q: Do you consider yourself to be more of a Michigan or Michigan State fan?

Not a fan of either school 32 (*differently worded question/response options)

If the numbers in the most recent poll are accurate, and not an outlier, they would seem to suggest slight erosion in support for Sparty.

The most recent poll also tested numbers on Michigan basketball history, particularly the Fab Five.

Twenty-three percent of Michigan adults said they had a positive opinion of the Fab Five as a whole, versus 12 percent who had an unfavorable opinion. Sixty-four percent were unsure.

But as U-M weighs whether to formally re-associate itself with the Fab Five on May 8, Chris Webber, the player who arguably suffers from the most strained relationship with the university, faces more mixed opinion.

Fourteen percent of Michiganders said they had a favorable impression of Webber, versus 15 percent who had a negative impression of him. Seventy-one percent were unsure.

Lastly, as baseball season approaches, the poll also tested support for the Tigers in the state. Sixty-eight percent of Michigan’s adults consider themselves fans of the Tigers, versus 17 percent who aren’t and 15 percent who are unsure.

The poll was conducted through automated telephone interviews – which are considered by most news organizations to be inferior to live response phone interviews – from March 2-4. PPP says the poll has a margin of error of +/- 3.7 percent.

that they choose the only slot available when they do not feel strongly allied with one or the other of two alternatives given? They could be ND fans, or not care about sports, or a million other things that have nothing to do with lacking opinions. This actually gives you a third insight--x% of people are not wrapped up in the rivalry.

Believe it or not, the sky over Ann Arbor was green once. On July 16, 1980, a squall line went over the Ann Arbor/Detroit area. Winds were over 100 mph. The rain was sideways, as were most unsecured objects.

Thanks for posting this, BlueinDC. I also follow PPP and they always include some unorthodox questions along with the standard political fare.

One possible caveat to these numbers: I believe that PPP just tacks on the sports queries to the end of its normal questioning, which means that they've already applied a registered voter screen. If the number of undecided/indifferent fans seems abnormally high, remember that this is not a poll of the Michigan population, it's a poll of registered voters who are willing to stay on the phone and answer a slew of political questions from a machine.

It's similar for 46 to 65, then it is a dead heat between the two schools once you get to 65 and older. Fab Five favorability increases some with each age group until you hit the oldest group, and it is lowest with the youngest group. It seems like an overwhelming majority in each group answer "not sure" regarding Webber too.

I have performed many polls and surveys on this board as well as professionally. Pollsters typically have two agendas: 1) push their opinion (political) and 2) garner support (ie ratings, followers) by trying to convince people that they (pollster, company etc) know what they are doing and are experts.

Now, the most reliable and well known pollsters (USA Today, CNN, Time, Pew Research, Fox News) dont have agendas but these are the exception and not the rule.

The sampling method is very critical with polls. Remember Dewey defeats Truman? In Statistics Class we had to disect the 1946 Presidential Election. The Chicago newspaper performed a telephone poll and their sampling showed that Republican Dewey won by a significant margin so the newspaper ran with the story thinking that the margin of victory was too great and would overcome sampling error.

The reason was simple. In 1946 mostly wealthy people could afford house, land-line phones. Wealthy people are dominately Republican. So the conclusion is that people with land line phones are Republican.

The same logic applies here. Most younger (under 30) people do not have land-line phones. So if a poll is conducted using traditional land-line phones then the sampling will be skewed toward older people. Now pollsters will try to ask for the age of the respondant and try to balance this out. However this method is NOT a true "Random Sample". This is why there is no poll that is perfect.

for me to conclude that "support for Sparty is waining". It could be sampling error. More information is needed: sample size, randomness of the respondants, method of sampling, etc.

However, if multiple polls are taken over time in a repeated method, the higher the confidence. Are the recent values a trend or are they measurement error? Where on the Bell Curve does each data point lie? This is actually a fun and interesting science.